Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27487404›Full record

ArticleJAMA cardiology2016

An Electrocardiogram-Based Risk Equation for Incident Cardiovascular Disease From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

Amit J Shah, Viola Vaccarino, A Cecile J W Janssens, W Dana Flanders, Suman Kundu, Emir Veledar, Peter W F Wilson, Elsayed Z Soliman

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Amit J ShahDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia2Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia3Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Atlanta, Georgia.
Viola VaccarinoDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia2Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
A Cecile J W JanssensDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia4Department of Clinical Genetics/EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
W Dana FlandersDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Suman KunduDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Emir VeledarDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia2Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia5Department of Biostatistics, Florida International University, Miami, Florida.
Peter W F WilsonDepartment of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia3Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Atlanta, Georgia.
Elsayed Z SolimanDepartment of Epidemiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina7Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Emory University · USEMGO Institute for Health and Care Research · NLFlorida International University · USWake Forest University · US

Funding

Atlanta Clinical and Translational Science Institute (ACTSI) RenewalUL1TR000454 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHENS, DAVID S · 2012 to 2016
$25.8M
Vascular Responses During Mental StressP01HL101398 · NHLBI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI SHEPS, DAVID SAMUEL · 2010 to 2015
$11.0M
Mental Stress and Myocardial Ischemia after MI: Sex Differences, Mechanisms and PrognosisR01HL109413 · NHLBI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI VACCARINO, VIOLA · 2012 to 2023
$6.9M
PTSD and Ischemic Heart Disease Progression: A Longitudinal Twin StudyR01HL125246 · NHLBI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI VACCARINO, VIOLA · 2015 to 2018
$3.4M
Atlanta Clinical and Translational Science Institute (ACTSI) RenewalKL2TR000455 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHENS, DAVID S · 2012 to 2016
$2.9M
Emotional Stress as a Risk Factor for Arrhythmia: Ischemic and Genetic MechanismsK23HL127251 · NHLBI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI SHAH, AMIT JASVANT · 2016 to 2019
$749k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000455NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL127251NHLBI NIH HHS P01 HL101398NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL109413NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL125246
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Electrocardiography (ECG) may detect subclinical cardiovascular disease (CVD) in asymptomatic individuals, but its role in assessing adverse events beyond traditional risk factors is not clear. Interval and vector data that are commonly available on modern ECGs may offer independent prognostic information that improves risk classification. Objectives: To derive and validate a CVD risk equation based on ECG metrics and to determine its incremental benefit in addition to the Framingham risk score (FRS). Design, Setting, and Participants: This study included 3640 randomly selected community-based adults aged 40 to 74 years without known CVD from the First National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES I) cohort (1971-1975) and 6329 from the NHANES III cohort (1988-1994). Participants were sampled from across the United States. A risk score to assess incident nonfatal and fatal CVD events was derived based on computer-generated ECG data, including frontal P, R, and T axes; heart rate; and PR, QRS, and QT intervals from NHANES I. The most prognostic variables, along with age and sex, were incorporated into the NHANES ECG risk equation. The equation was evaluated in the NHANES III cohort for an independent validation. Follow-up in the NHANES III cohort was completed on December 31, 2006. Data for this study were analyzed from August 11, 2015, to May 20, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was CVD death. Secondary outcomes included 10-year ischemic heart disease and all-cause death. Results: The final study sample included 9969 participants (4714 men [47.3%]; 5255 women [52.7%]; mean [SD] age, 55.3 [10.1] years) from both cohorts. Frontal T axis, heart rate, and heart rate-corrected QT interval were the most significant ECG factors in the NHANES I cohort. In the validation cohort (NHANES III), the equation provided for prognostic information for fatal CVD with a hazard ratio (HR) of 3.23 (95% CI, 2.82-3.72); the C statistic was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.76-0.81). When added to the FRS in Cox proportional hazards regression models, the categorical (1%, 5%, and 10% cutoffs) net reclassification improvement was 24%. When the FRS and ECG scores were combined in a single model, the C statistic improved by 0.04 (95% CI, 0.02-0.06) to 0.80 (95% CI, 0.77-0.82). Similar improvements were noted when the ECG score was added to the pooled cohort equation. When the equation for prognostic information about ischemic heart disease and all-cause death was evaluated, the results were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: An ECG risk score based on age, sex, heart rate, frontal T axis, and QT interval assesses the risk for CVD and compares favorably with the FRS alone in an independent cohort of asymptomatic individuals. Although the ECG risk equation is low cost, further research is needed to ascertain whether this additional step in risk stratification may improve prevention efforts and reduce CVD events.

Indexed as

ElectrocardiographyRisk AssessmentAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID27487404
PMCPMC5881386
OpenAlexW2477201220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.